Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36063060›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022

Widening or narrowing inequalities? The equity implications of digital tools to support COVID-19 contact tracing: A qualitative study.

Catherine A O'Donnell, Sara Macdonald, Susan Browne, Alessio Albanese, David Blane, Tracy Ibbotson, Lynn Laidlaw, David Heaney, David J Lowe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Barriers to adopting digital contact tracing for COVID-19: Experiences in New Zealand.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Widening or narrowing inequalities? The equity implications of digital tools to support COVID-19 contact tracing: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Catherine A O'DonnellGeneral Practice and Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.ORCID 0000-0002-5368-3779
Sara MacdonaldGeneral Practice and Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
Susan BrowneGeneral Practice and Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
Alessio AlbaneseGeneral Practice and Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
David BlaneGeneral Practice and Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.ORCID 0000-0002-3872-3621
Tracy IbbotsonGeneral Practice and Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
Lynn LaidlawPublic and Patient Involvement and Engagement Group, College of Medicine, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
David HeaneyRossall Research and Consultancy, Ullapool, Scotland.
David J LoweNHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Digital Health and Care Institute, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.ORCID 0000-0003-4866-2049

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs digital tools are increasingly used to support COVID-19 contact tracing, the equity implications must be considered. As part of a study to understand the public's views of digital contact tracing tools developed for the national 'Test and Protect' programme in Scotland, we aimed to explore the views of groups often excluded from such discussions. This paper reports on their views about the potential for contact tracing to exacerbate inequalities.

methodsA qualitative study was carried out; interviews were conducted with key informants from organizations supporting people in marginalized situations, followed by interviews and focus groups with people recruited from these groups. Participants included, or represented, minority ethnic groups, asylum seekers and refugees and those experiencing multiple disadvantage including severe and enduring poverty.

resultsA total of 42 people participated: 13 key informants and 29 members of the public. While public participants were supportive of contact tracing, key informants raised concerns. Both sets of participants spoke about how contact tracing, and its associated digital tools, might increase inequalities. Barriers included finances (inability to afford smartphones or the data to ensure access to the internet); language (digital tools were available only in English and required a degree of literacy, even for English speakers); and trust (many marginalized groups distrusted statutory organizations and there were concerns that data may be passed to other organizations). One strength was that NHS Scotland, the data guardian, is seen as a generally trustworthy organization. Poverty was recognized as a barrier to people's ability to self-isolate. Some participants were concerned about giving contact details of individuals who might struggle to self-isolate for financial reasons.

conclusionsThe impact of contact tracing and associated digital tools on marginalized populations needs careful monitoring. This should include the contact tracing process and the ability of people to self-isolate. Regular clear messaging from trusted groups and community members could help maintain trust and participation in the programme. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Our patient and public involvement coapplicant, L. L., was involved in all aspects of the study including coauthorship. Interim results were presented to our local Public and Patient Involvement and Engagement Group, who commented on interpretation and made suggestions about further recruitment.

Indexed as

Contact TracingCOVID-19Focus GroupsHumansQualitative ResearchTrustcontact tracingCOVID-19digital toolsinequalitiesmarginalized populations

Identifiers

PMID36063060
PMCPMC9538145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.